ReviewHeart rhythm O22025
Cardiac implantable electronic devices in the setting of tricuspid valve intervention: Risks, options, extraction and future perspectives: A state-of-the-art review.
Review in Heart rhythm O2, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Single-Session Transcatheter Aortic and Tricuspid Valve-in-Valve Implantation in a Patient with Prior Multivalve Surgery and a Chronic Transvenous Pacing Lead: A Case-Based Review of Procedural Strategy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Mechanical versus bioprosthetic valves for tricuspid valve replacement in Chinese patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Comparison of Outcomes of Leadless Versus Transvenous Pacemakers Following Tricuspid Valve Surgery.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Jailed or freed? The lead dilemma in transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Article
- State of the art: Transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention.JRSM cardiovascular diseaseReview
- Permanent pacing via coronary sinus after tricuspid valve replacement: Keep bipolar coronary sinus leads on hand!Indian pacing and electrophysiology journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tricuspid regurgitation is associated with increased risk of heart failure and mortality. To address this, tricuspid valve (TV) interventions in the form of transcatheter and surgical TV procedures have rapidly emerged. TV interventions are associated with a significant risk of conduction system disease necessitating permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. Limited data and current guidelines suggest that transvalvular PPM should be avoided to preserve the function of replaced or repaired TVs. With the rapid increase of transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve replacements in the last decade, the incidence of pre-existing PPM lead entrapment poses a clinical challenge in which lead extraction is indicated, particularly in the context of device infection. In this review article, we discuss the risks of conduction system disease associated with different TV interventions, the options for pacing, defibrillator therapy and cardiac resynchronization therapy that spare the TV, and the management of pre-existing transvalvular pacing leads before TV intervention. Furthermore, we discuss the future perspectives in this field, including a completely leadless cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator system, and propose an algorithm for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation during or after TV intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.